The proposal would require that all voters in the state show photo identification before voting. Legislation to enact similar laws without a constitutional amendment passed both chambers of the Minnesota Legislature, but were vetoed by Governor of MinnesotaMark Dayton.[1][2] Since the special session was to be devoted to pressing budget issues, Republicans were expected to push the measure early in the 2012 session.[3][4]

Background

In late February, 2012, Minnesota lawmakers reportedly began considering an alternative to the voter ID amendment. The alternative is a so-called "electronic poll book" and is currently circulating the legislature as a bill. Democratic Secretary of StateMark Ritchie has touted the poll book as a less expensive option that would allow election officials to look up existing drivers' license photos or take new ones of voters at polling places. Secretary Ritchie spoke to a House committee on the suggestion saying that it would be an easier system for many voters, his examples included those who no longer drive, or those who have changed addresses whiteout updating their ID. Some in the legislature see the bill as a diversionary tactic or as a law to merely augment the amendment, such as, state Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer who said, "We see it as complementary, maybe, but not a substitute." Others, such as, Republican Senator John Howe see it as an alternative to using the amendment process, saying, "I can’t speak to whether this does anything on the constitutional amendment for photo ID. But I can tell you that I personally, along with many of my colleagues, want to see things done as much as we can legislatively."[5]

Text of measure

The question to be presented to the voters is as follows:

"Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require all voters to present valid photo identification to vote and to require the state to provide free identification to eligible voters, effective July 1, 2013?"

Constitutional Changes

Support

Sen. Scott Newman, the bill author, calls the proposal an "additional measure of integrity." According to reports, Newman said his proposal is to add "photo ID mandate to age, residency and citizenship voting requirements already in the state Constitution."[8]

Opposition

"A new voter ID would disproportionately affect older voters because we know they're less likely to have the required identification," said Amy McDonough, a spokesperson with AARP. The AARP, or American Association of Retired Persons, is against the proposed measure.[9]

Opponents

Tactics and strategies

In February the ACLU of Minnesota offered a $1,000 reward to anyone who could find a convicted case of voter impersonation, a kind of voter fraud that would be prevented by the voter-ID law. In March, Dan McGrath, of Minnesota Majority, claimed the prize showing court records of 2008 case in which a woman voted twice, once in her own name, and once in her daughter's name through an absentee ballot. Chuck Samuelson, executive director of ACLU-Minnesota, said he would review the case and award the prize if everything checked out, however, he did add that the fact that prosecutors found the case means that the current system is working without voter ID.[13]

The Willmar Area League of Women Voters has planned program on the amendment to be held at 7 p.m. on May 14 at the Bethel Lutheran Church in Willmar.[10]

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed with the Minnesota Supreme Court challenging the wording of the ballot question itself. Charles Samuelson, executive director of the ACLU-MN, said, "This ballot proposal is incredibly troubling because it asks voters to put an amendment in the Constitution in a manner that is misleading, confusing and unclear."[15]

Path to the ballot

Proposed amendments must be agreed to by a majority of the members of each chamber of the Minnesota State Legislature.

In Minnesota, the only type of ballot measure permitted are legislatively-referred constitutional amendments. Pursuing a ballot amendment instead of normal legislation would allow lawmakers to circumvent a veto by Gov. Mark Dayton (D). One of the chief proponents of a voter identification requirement is Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer (R). Before attempting to take the issue to the ballot, she pursued two bills which would mandate voter identification via traditional legislation. These bills are as follows:

However, the measure was held off the ballot. Another version of the bill was being considered in legislature, therefore a conference committee drafted a compromise bill, one that would be placed on the ballot should the state legislature approve it. According to reports, the compromise bill was passed unanimously by the committee, sending it one more time to the lawmaking body for ballot approval.[23]

This compromise version of the bill was ten passed by the House on April 3, 2012, with a 72-57 vote. The next day it was passed by the Senate on a vote of 35-29.[24]